Ingo Molnar <mi...@kernel.org> writes: > * Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuzn...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuzn...@redhat.com> writes: >> >> > Changes since v9: >> > - Rebase to 4.13-rc3. >> > - Drop PATCH1 as it was already taken by Greg to char-misc tree. There're >> > no >> > functional dependencies on this patch so the series can go through a >> > different tree >> > (and it actually belongs to x86 if I got Ingo's comment right). >> > - Add in missing void return type in PATCH1 [Colin King, Ingo Molnar, Greg >> > KH] >> > - A few minor fixes in what is now PATCH7: add pr_fmt, tiny style fix in >> > hyperv_flush_tlb_others() [Andy Shevchenko] >> > - Fix "error: implicit declaration of function 'virt_to_phys'" in PATCH2 >> > reported by kbuild test robot (#include <asm/io.h>) >> > - Add Steven's 'Reviewed-by:' to PATCH9. >> >> Thomas, Ingo, Greg, >> >> do I get it right that the intention is to take this series through x86 >> tree? (See: https://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg2561174.html) If so, >> is there anything else I need to do to get it accepted? > > Yeah, the patches are arch/x86/-heavy, so that would be the ideal workflow - > it's > just that the series coincided with x86 maintainers vacation time! > > I've picked them up now into tip:x86/platform (they look good to me) and will > push > them out after some testing. >
Great, thanks! -- Vitaly
